I know you’re running out of time America, but I want to at least offer some alternative options given that Trump is still in the race and Hillary isn’t exactly winning the hearts of the masses.

We all know that the President doesn’t actually do anything… it’s more of an important figurehead role, right? Surely that means you should be looking at people that have already invested time and effort to actually know that it’s all about; walked a mile in their shoes, so to speak. With that in mind, I offer the following alternative options…

Okay – I realise this is a little late to be putting forward alternatives, but let’s at least learn for the next time round. The US elections have much more wide reaching results than your borders, and we’re looking on in horror at what is playing out at the moment.

]]>I’ve decided I’m going to win the EuroMillion Lottery this weekend, currently estimated at £135M, however I’ve put in the hard work ahead of time planning on how I’m going to spend that money. This vanity post covers that scenario.

As this post already demonstrates, I’m about planning, so the first thing I’d set aside is money that I would not spend, but rather put into very secure savings – that would be the first £12M

Next, set aside something to help others – charity. Set aside £20M for that.

After the sensible and honourable things, come the ‘wants’, starting with an island. Turtle Island, a small island off Australia will set me back about £4.5M, including a budget to set it up with some basic home comforts.

Having an island is cool, but having a floating palace is amazing – so the next big spend would be a super yacht, a snip at £15M for a small one that would accommodate 10 people (in addition to the 15 crew).

We’re already an international family, across South Africa, Australia, the US and the UK, so having houses near family is important:

Speaking of the international family, sharing is its own reward and for that I’d set aside £19M for parents and siblings.

The entrepreneurial part of me also wants to see MiFile invested in, so that it can grow (£2.5M) and blossom. More broadly, I’d set aside a big chunk to invest in startups (£25M) – probably focusing on tech and renewable energy.

Lastly, I’d like to try a social experiment by getting a large plot of land (in Colorado perhaps) and inviting 20 families to start a new style of living that doesn’t have money as the key value or measure of success (£15M).

Startups are often cash constrained in the early days, before the products ship and you build a market. Luckily, there are many tools available online to help you set up a professional business from day one, allowing you to invest when you have actual money coming in the door.

This is my ‘go to’ list, not a comparison of options, and all of the tools/ services listed here are free, at least for a useful period of time. Note that I’m not affiliated with any service provider listed and I don’t get any referral or commission from any of them.

Simple Website – Wix

For those companies looking for a simple website, that non-technical people can create and manage, Wix makes a good first consideration.

This online service has a free tier that is perfect for startups looking to build an online presence. You can select from a good selection of templates and then it’s a matter of producing your own content and publishing it. Most of the templates also present well on mobile devices (tech speak: responsive design).

Professional images

The online world is very visual and finding good images that look professional and can be used commercially can be a challenge. In this area I have three preferred resources: Pixabay, Unsplash and Flickr.

All Pixabay and Unsplash images can be used for commercial sites, however for Flickr you’ll need to set the search filter to show only images that can be used commercially.

Online Support Service – FreshDesk

Once you start selling your products and services you’ll want somewhere to co-ordinate support for your customers and partners. FreshDesk is a solution that can grow as your business does, starting at their free tier. Configuring it takes a little trial and error, but with most technology like this I suggest you just tinker and give it a try. There are tutorials if you need more help.

Within the free tier you can also customise the Freshdesk portal with your logo, a custom URL (e.g. yourcompany.freshdesk.com) and add FAQ for people to help themselves so that you don’t have to spend time answering the same question to lots of different people. You can also manage a small team of support people – up to 3 within the free tier – as well as set-up SLA (service level agreements – how quickly you respond and aim to fix issues).

CRM – Insightly

Having a place to track and manage your sales pipeline and partnerships is very useful, and larger companies tend to spend a lot of money on large Customer Relationship Management system, such as Salesforce and Microsoft Dynamics. For a startup, Insightly offers a great free tier that you can scale up as you grow.

You can setup a memorable URL (e.g. yourcompany.insight.ly), customise the fields for customer and companies, set up campaigns and manage tasks. There are some limits within the free tier, such as how many records you can keep, but this is a good place to start and pay as you grow.

Hopefully this list is useful in getting you going. Please do share any other useful resources that you think could make a difference to cash strapped startups.

TV shows like Game of Thrones, Mad Men and the West Wing get a lot of attention – often rightly so. Other shows go quietly under the radar, usually because their genre brings a negative bias when looking at the box cover. Space ships, pirates, western… these genres are so powerful, that they tend to drive a binary response; I like it, or I hate it.

So here I suggest three often overlooked TV series’ – all of which have done very well with people that like the genre or have stumbled upon them by accident, which is more often the case for me.

Battlestar Galactica
90%

Hell on Wheels
89%

Black Sails
90%

Well, you’ll be missing some of the best inter-personal drama. Don’t let the spaceship theme get in the way. Reframe the genre; this plays more like the Hunt for Red October, with tension borne out of people enclosed in a tightly controlled space with enormous threat all around them – some imagined, some real.

The character development is excellently executed and you learn to care about the crew of the Battlestar, a huge battleship in space, protecting the last of humanity as they are hunted by a relentless aggressors in the form of the cylons.

The chase takes place over 4 seasons, and whilst there are some slow patches, the overall story is powerful and consistent. It also offers one of those rare things in TV series – a complete finish. You may not like the finish, but it does give you the closure that you never get when a series just ends or is pulled.

Hell on Wheels is aptly named, telling the story of how the US transnational railway was built – by hard men in a hard time, when the west was still being opened up. The story tracks several events of the time, from politics through to the growth of the mormon religion.

The series doesn’t shy away from tougher themes, like slavery and prostitution, portraying them in the context of the time.

You won’t find yourself necessarily wishing to live in time before medicine and toilet paper, but you will see the honesty in accomplishing something as massive as carving a railway into the raw, untamed world.

Again – the people and their relationships are at the heart of this story, with Cullen Bohanen taking centre stage. He is a moral man, hard on himself and driven by his set of values that are often at odds with the world around him.

The good news here is that the sixth season is currently in production, with five very strong seasons already aired.

This TV series tells about the events that led to the story of Treasure Island. This is done very subtly, and the world is very richly filled with the history of the time – drawing from the struggle between different empires in their quests to claim the new world. The pirates stand as their own rule of law between the different forces, and have set themselves up with their own island fortress.

Battle on the high sea is dramatic and beautifully shot. The sea and world are as much characters as any other actors, rich in their content and context.

The power play between the pirates and the empires is matched evenly by the inter-pirate conflict, with some truly powerful acting and story writing.

In a US election race that was predicted by the Simpsons in 2000, that sees Trump vs. Clinton, for the role of president in 2017, I think a fictional character is a better outcome. So I’m nominating Will McAvoy, based largely on the video below, and more fully due to the intelligent character written by Aaron Sorkin for The Newsroom series.

54%

“A lackluster action that doesn’t really build depth in characters or the world in which they live – watch the old Greystoke instead”

Alexander Skarsgård has the classical look for the role, but doesn’t have any of the depth that makes us care about him or believe that he is connected to Africa. Samuel L. Jackson is… well, Samuel L. Jackson, bringing a flat performance that seems totally contrived to give a US context to a movie audience that wouldn’t otherwise care.

Even Christoph Waltz – who I usually enjoy – is a lower cut villain with a paper thin motive.

There are moments when the world looks beautiful, with some grand sweeping African views, but other than the beauty of the view, we again don’t really connect with the character or story.

Issues of slavery and the USA’s position on taking the moral high ground, seem out of place for an even more out of place Samuel L Jackson. This imposing of modern values is out of place and doesn’t really make much sense even though it is a key element in the story.

I enjoyed Djimon Hounsou, as I do in most of his roles, but again the writers took a lazy approach in having a very thin, superficial approach to telling his story.

I try to balance my personal views by considering a mix of elements when coming up with a rating for a film, based on the following areas:

Respect Source: Does the film respect the source material, if applicable. Does it reward those who are already invested in the characters and world that the movie represents?

IMDB: The world’s largest collection of movie information, the International Movie Database also allows its users to vote on films. The addition of this element represents the popular vote – at the point in time when I did the review.

Rotten Tomatoes: RT is well known for offering professional critical review on films and seems the most appropriate way to represent that portion of the viewers.

Actors: Here I try to consider how well the actor plays their part – it’s more about the people bringing the characters to life, rather than the wider story.

World: This rating represents the world in which the movie takes place – does it enhance the story, or detract? Is it consistent, or does it leave big gaps? It’s all the things happening around the actors.

Production: This element considers the direction, production value, set design, writing, etc – here I try to consider all the technical elements that may or may not be in front of the camera.

My Rating: What does my head and heart say about this movie, as soon as I come out of the movie theatre? It’s the gut reaction vote.

]]>http://neilsmeyer.com/the-legend-of-tarzan/feed/0Britain is Great!http://neilsmeyer.com/proudly-british/
http://neilsmeyer.com/proudly-british/#respondSun, 26 Jun 2016 00:29:53 +0000http://neilsmeyer.com/?p=256We are now on the other side of the 2016 EU referendum, where the majority…

]]>We are now on the other side of the 2016 EU referendum, where the majority of the British people voted to leave the EU. In addition to being historic, it is also terrifying, exhilarating, horrifying, confounding, scary, thrilling… Voting out is a very un-British thing to do – at least, very 21st century un-British. It is, however, very Great British – representative of the explorers, industrialists, adventurers, innovators and inventors of this proud nation’s past.

The Remain campaign had two significant levers to ensure a predictable ‘stay’ outcome – the twin bedrocks of risk aversion and inertia. These should not be easily dismissed. Change is hard, it is uncomfortable and it comes with risk; but overcoming these very factors are what allow us to reach for greatness in most human endeavours.

If you are one of those that is motivated by fear, then consider this quote:

This chills me to my core. The most senior person within the EU dismissing the power of democratic choice within the body that now regulates how we do business, legislate and operate as a nation within the EU.

It is also widely held that we have, as a result of voting to leave the EU, somehow reduced or marginalised the opportunities for ourselves and our children. The very opposite seems true to me.

Global Trade

Trade with the EU countries does make up a substantial part of our economy, although it is in decline having fallen from 55% of our exports, to 45% over the past ten years. During this same time, negotiation to open up new trade agreements between the EU and India (who grew at 5%, compared to the EU shrinking by 0.3% last year) have not been concluded after 9 years of negotiation. Similarly, trade agreements with Australia are threatened because of a dispute by tomato farmers in Italy – a situation far outside of the UK’s control or interest.

Europe is the only continent that is not growing. For a fuller commentary see this report from MEP Daniel Hannan.

Exiting the EU does not mean we give up our interest or opportunity to trade with EU countries – they will still want to sell us their fine wines and luxury cars. We remain part of the European Free Trade Zone, which includes all the EU countries and some 40+ countries in total – from Iceland to Turkey. Additionally our role within the Commonwealth gives us access to a global community that operate with English as the standard language of trade, with many using UK based commercial law.

Joining the EU meant that the United Kingdom has no sovereignty to sign a bilateral trade agreement outside of the EU. How can opening up more options be a greater risk than devolving your rights to a central control centre that has to consider the rights and interest of a growing list of countries?

I believe that the greatest risk to the UK now is the voice of the minority electorate, most of whom represent the voice of media, business, the higher income earners and vested EU interests, who are clamouring for a way to dodge the vote result.

These people hold up the values and virtues of democracy, whilst they work for their own interests, and then quickly seek to undermine the results when they do not agree with the outcome. (Un)fortunately that is NOT democracy – that is cherry picking.

Suggesting that the electorate was not informed enough, smart enough, fair minded enough or aware of the big picture when placing their cross in the election, is frankly insulting. When the lowest 10% of earners take home less than 3% of the wealth, and are then denied the result that they have voted for, you have the very definition of elitist behaviour. Almost 30% of children are living in poverty in the UK; the votes of their parents must count.

The very people that fight for the right of those in poverty, the growing middle class who care and are socially engaged, seem the quickest to deny those very people the right to vote – pointing out that they will instead have it worse. This is very much at odds with the logic – leaving the EU is likely to mean a drop in house prices, a reduction in people entering the UK and every chance for improved prices for many household goods and services. This is a good thing when you can’t afford a house, don’t have a job and can’t afford to feed your family.

To work against the voice of the majority, or to belittle its value in any way, is a direct attack on democracy.

Does any country manage without being within the EU?

Let’s consider for a moment what the UK has going for it:

5th largest economy in the world

4th largest military budget in the world

6th major tourist destination in the world

London has the most international visitors of any city in the world

The UK is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, a member of NATO, the Commonwealth of Nations, the G7 finance ministers, the G7 forum (previously the G8 forum), the G20, the OECD, the WTO, the Council of Europe and the OSCE

The UK continues to maintain its “Special Relationship” with the US.

This seems like a pretty good start! It’s not the résumé of a country that should be nervous about representing itself on the global stage.

Looking around we can quickly find good examples of countries that seem to be doing just fine outside of the EU. Two of the top three countries in the Quality of Life ranking include Switzerland and Norway. Both also rank at the top of the Most Prosperous Countries Index.

Where else can we look to see examples of countries operating successfully in a global economy? Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Singapore, Japan – all are operating doing fine outside of the EU. India is positively booming and the UK is the third largest investor in India, is India’s third largest investment destination and has almost 1.5 Million citizens of Indian origin living in the UK.

We have great options and amazing opportunities.

Choosing to leave, is not voting for UKIP

I don’t like UKIP policies and I think Boris is the UK’s version of the farce that is Trump. To suggest that voting to stay somehow means that you endorse the crazies, is like saying people who drive a foreign car are anti-British.

We do however quickly need to identify the leaders we believe can steer a course to a prosperous future for the UK. Any frustration or fear at the result of the referendum would be better targeted at finding and building a world class team to represent us at the global table.

My views specifically exclude the immigration question, as I believe that is an overplayed excuse for people to suggest that everyone voted to Leave largely because of immigration – I don’t think that is true. Yes, people care about security, free movement and immigration controls – they are not all right wing immigrant haters, and to tar them with that brush reveals more about you than them, I would suggest.

Hopefully if nothing else, you can see that there might be a reason to look towards a positive future based on increased economic development. The vote offers us a way to re-define our place on the global stage, open opportunities to innovators and investors, and to build on the foundations laid by some of the most forward thinking people who made this Britain great!

48%

“A failed attempt to show the glory of the Egyptian pantheon of Gods in an action film that never connects with the viewer”

This film fails despite using all the correct ingredients. You’ll find stunning sets, a solid selection of actors and a reasonable storyline, all playing to the current taste for fantasy fiction action movies. The film tells the parallel stories of two human lovers and of the changing leadership of the gods.

Unfortunately the lead human character is under developed and we don’t really care for him – or for the love connection. His values are questionable, and his disdain for the gods is difficult to understand or believe. The gods themselves are given little development, and again we never really connect or care about them.

The special effects are good in places, but look very computer generated in others – and the inconsistency means we never really buy into the world.

I really wanted to enjoy this movie more, seeing how it scored roughly the same as Warcraft with many reviewers, however on this occasion I agree that this is one you can happily pass on.

The story had plenty to build on, to connect us with the characters in a more meaningful way.

Expanding on the way that Horus (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau – of Game of Thrones) fought for his love, Hathor (Elodie Yung) by defeating 47 demons. That would at least give us some depth to these characters and demonstrate the might of gods.

Our human lead, Bek (Brenton Thwaites) is a thief, with little in the way of redeeming virtues. He gets by on his wits and an amazing amount of luck (which amazes even the gods…). His love interest, Zaya (Courtney Eaton) seems more like a sister character than a lover – and she too isn’t that nice of a person, stealing from her employee and accepting (encouraging) Bek’s stolen goods.

I do generally like Gerard Butler usually, and his portrayal of the god Set is fine – nothing great, but watchable.

I try to balance my personal views by considering a mix of elements when coming up with a rating for a film, based on the following areas:

Respect Source: Does the film respect the source material, if applicable. Does it reward those who are already invested in the characters and world that the movie represents?

IMDB: The world’s largest collection of movie information, the International Movie Database also allows its users to vote on films. The addition of this element represents the popular vote – at the point in time when I did the review.

Rotten Tomatoes: RT is well known for offering professional critical review on films and seems the most appropriate way to represent that portion of the viewers.

Actors: Here I try to consider how well the actor plays their part – it’s more about the people bringing the characters to life, rather than the wider story.

World: This rating represents the world in which the movie takes place – does it enhance the story, or detract? Is it consistent, or does it leave big gaps? It’s all the things happening around the actors.

Production: This element considers the direction, production value, set design, writing, etc – here I try to consider all the technical elements that may or may not be in front of the camera.

My Rating: What does my head and heart say about this movie, as soon as I come out of the movie theatre? It’s the gut reaction vote.

86%

“Deadpool nails it – no not like that..! I mean the movie is brilliant and scores a home-run with a committed cast and a strong story that is true to the source material”

The 4th wall breaking, merc with a mouth was expected to do well with the fans, but few thought it was going to do as well as it did – especially with the R/ 18 rating.

Ryan Reynolds shines in this movie, successfully exorcising the demons of Green Lantern past. As the various trailers show, the movie walks the balance between action and comedy very successfully. The action sequences are impressively grand – from the motorway chase to the climatic end scenes.

The supporting actors – real and CGI – are well fleshed out, each with their own quirks and ticks. I’m not a fan of bouncing around timelines, but it seems to work in this movie.

Overall this is a fan favourite that seemed to crack the mainstream audience. I don’t think it has the same re-watchability as other movies, but it is nonetheless a very enjoyable – if somewhat adult orientated – two hours of entertainment.

The addition of the helicarrier in the end was great – and it does sort of tether it to the MCU – whilst obviously taking pot shots at the existing X-men franchises, with references to “Stewart or McAvoy?” by Deadpool.

I try to balance my personal views by considering a mix of elements when coming up with a rating for a film, based on the following areas:

Respect Source: Does the film respect the source material, if applicable. Does it reward those who are already invested in the characters and world that the movie represents?

IMDB: The world’s largest collection of movie information, the International Movie Database also allows its users to vote on films. The addition of this element represents the popular vote – at the point in time when I did the review.

Rotten Tomatoes: RT is well known for offering professional critical review on films and seems the most appropriate way to represent that portion of the viewers.

Actors: Here I try to consider how well the actor plays their part – it’s more about the people bringing the characters to life, rather than the wider story.

World: This rating represents the world in which the movie takes place – does it enhance the story, or detract? Is it consistent, or does it leave big gaps? It’s all the things happening around the actors.

Production: This element considers the direction, production value, set design, writing, etc – here I try to consider all the technical elements that may or may not be in front of the camera.

My Rating: What does my head and heart say about this movie, as soon as I come out of the movie theatre? It’s the gut reaction vote.

58%

“A darker re-visioning of the DC world and its most loved characters, that crams in too much and loses the audience”

The first encounter between Superman and Batman on the big screen is a failed effort that tries to cram in too many plots and ultimately fails to deliver. This seems mainly as a result of the writing and direction, rather than the acting.

Prior to release, DC showed way too much in the trailers – Lex is cooky crazy, Batman is twisted and Superman is dark and brooding, and we even see the trinity (Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman) readying to battle Doomsday. The movie fills in the blanks between the different film clips used in the trailer, without adding a great deal more.

The acting performances are solid, and Ben Affleck makes a very good Batman. Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor is painful to watch, but at least you believe he’s playing it the way it was written. Henry Cavill reprises his dark version of Superman – draining the joy and hope out of this comic paragon. Only Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman remains true to the comic source, in terms of strength and presence.

Between the telling of the core story and the many dream sequences (visions of the future?), the movie feels messy and is likely to only be fully understood as part of the full Justice League/ DCU set of films – I hope. And boy do they cram everything into this movie – at least five major story arcs, each of which would have made a good stand alone film.

Should you watch it? Yes. There are some iconic moments, like when Superman and Batman face off for the first time – when Batman rises from the Batmobile. But set your expectation low and you’ll enjoy it… probably.

Most of the key plot points are shown in the trailer, so the spoiler review really discusses the failure of the direction against the source material – the very thing that justifies making films in the first place.

Let me start with the biggest disappointment: Lex Luthor. This crazy, childish, version would have us believe that he already knows all the key players and their alter egos. Yes – he knows that Clark is Superman, Bruce Wayne is Batman and Diana Prince is Wonder Woman. He even has files on all the Justice League characters.

More than knowing this information, he is able to manipulate the likes of Bruce Wayne into hating Superman based on the outcome of a Kryptonian attack that only Superman was able to fight on behalf of humanity.

This all-knowing Lex has his weaknesses – his facial ticks, his fetish for feeding people sweets and his inability to choose a suit that fits him properly. He also doesn’t seem to care much for those that are closest to him, happily sacrificing Mercy (his personal assistant) to the explosion at the hearing.

And what is his ultimate plan to get rid of these beings that are so powerful and beyond his control? Ah yes, of course – release something even worse in the form of Doomsday… Yes, that seems like a good solution. Did anyone even think this through at Warner?

Next: Batman and Superman. Boy do these guys like to brood and have so very little regard for human life. It’s fine to want to try something different, but you don’t remove the very core that makes them who they are to do that. Superman and Batman don’t kill. Period. They just don’t. In this film they do, easily and often – and even cruelly, such as when Batman brands criminals.

I don’t care that we might live in darker times, the very nature of these heroes is to raise our expectations of ourselves and others, to demonstrate by example that there is a better way and you should not compromise on your core values.

Unfortunately the movie also shows that our heroes are … well, stupid. Batman, you know, the world’s greatest detective, will not spend any time trying to understand this mighty new player (Superman) that he hates and must destroy. Clark Kent, a Pulitzer prize winner, doesn’t know who the billionaire Bruce Wayne is (even though he lives on the other side of the bay).

And why so many major story arcs in one movie? The battle between Batman and Superman, the reveal of both their identities, the first time DC’s big three clash, Doomsday and the death of Superman..! Really… someone signed off all that for one movie? And that doesn’t even include the dream sequences – Batman on Apocalypse and the Flash coming back in time to warn Bruce Wayne.

My prediction for how this might play out:

Superman will be resurrected by Darkseid, and join that side in the coming battle. This is why the future vision shows an army wearing Superman’s symbol during the Apocalypse sequence. The Justice League will form to battle the combined might of Darkseid and Superman, with Lois (as warned by Flash) being the tipping point that will bring Superman back into the fold.

This could be a good story, but the way in which WB are rushing to vomit out all the story demonstrates a lack of belief in their characters, their ability to tell strong stories or/ and build a believable universe. It can be done, and it takes time – just ask Marvel…

I try to balance my personal views by considering a mix of elements when coming up with a rating for a film, based on the following areas:

Respect Source: Does the film respect the source material, if applicable. Does it reward those who are already invested in the characters and world that the movie represents?

IMDB: The world’s largest collection of movie information, the International Movie Database also allows its users to vote on films. The addition of this element represents the popular vote – at the point in time when I did the review.

Rotten Tomatoes: RT is well known for offering professional critical review on films and seems the most appropriate way to represent that portion of the viewers.

Actors: Here I try to consider how well the actor plays their part – it’s more about the people bringing the characters to life, rather than the wider story.

World: This rating represents the world in which the movie takes place – does it enhance the story, or detract? Is it consistent, or does it leave big gaps? It’s all the things happening around the actors.

Production: This element considers the direction, production value, set design, writing, etc – here I try to consider all the technical elements that may or may not be in front of the camera.

My Rating: What does my head and heart say about this movie, as soon as I come out of the movie theatre? It’s the gut reaction vote.